The letter asserts that Carcieri is a symptom of a greater frustration felt by state governments relating to the current fee to trust process and asking Congress to consider state interests. Importantly, the letter offers nothing suggesting what those interests might be or what these AGs want in a potential Carcieri fix.

There are at least two reasons for this, I suspect. First, 17 AGs probably can’t agree on what those state interests are. And second, maybe these state AGs are leaving unsaid the obvious — they want more control over Indian lands, perhaps even veto power over fee to trust transfers and over activities on trust land.

And that’s what the Supreme Court handed state governments with their very wrongheaded decision in Carcieri. A Carcieri cure might be worse than the disease.